[removed]

[removed]

Egyptians used to mummify everything. I’ve read about massive cat cemeteries. Mummified Ibis have been found. I think dogs - it wasn’t just for pharaohs!

[removed]

OK, that narrows it down a bit - maybe too much, because I can't find anything that really fits the bill: what's out there tends to be too general, too academic or coming at it from a more ideological or sectional standpoint - which is fine, it's just probably not what you're looking for.

What you do have is the luxury of being able to pick from both academic and popular treatments to suit your purpose. I'd start by familiarising yourself with existing relevant works, evaluating each kind for the elements you're looking for even if you don't find the style there that you want: the "tricks of the trade" are there on the page, it's just a matter of selecting those that work best.

In terms of material, for the popular side you can draw largely on those secondary works, but for the more scholarly angle you'd want to delve into the archives - and maybe census returns for the labour environment and women's participation, while for Prohibition I wouldn't overlook contemporary newspapers which can often provide valuable period detail. Recorded eyewitness testimony can add further flavour: the 1920s may be too early to feature in any but the earliest oral history collections but may be recounted in intervening documentaries (for which unused material may also occasionally survive).

Sorry I drew a blank: I hope there's the odd useful idea there. Perhaps when you're finished you can write the guide too - there seems to be a gap in the market.

You have to practice on something I guess

[removed]

Im aiming for the sweet spot between academic and popular. I’ve got several things going at the moment. Prohibition, policing, labor, and some womens things at the local level. All meant to tie into each other eventually.

As for your last question: both, actually. Writing and research

While the basic plans are known from surveys and digs and fragmentary accounts survive along with the occasional tablet or relief showing a peripheral part of the layout (at least for Babylon), there isn't enough for a reliable cityscape or reconstruction of daily life. A lot remains to be excavated, though, so hopefully more will turn up when conditions are favourable.

Social history (like history in general) covers a wide range of themes and approaches, and there isn't a uniform style: it can be a dry analytical treatment or a bodice-ripping account of the racier side of life; it can cover anything from the development of working-class identity and organisation or the situation of women in the family and economic or public life to the evolution of elite taste & etiquette, the latter mercifully not so much in favour nowadays.

So it would help if you could be a bit more specific about the kind of topic or framework you have in mind: each brings its own challenges and likely readership. And do you mean the actual writing, or rather the appropriate research techniques and sources?

Vodka is alcohol and water, that's it. All alcohol is the same thing regardless of the source. They used grain.

I’m trying to learn more about Social History and looking for some writing guides. Are there any texts about Social History/Writing social history? Thanks!

It's very much pop history. He's really not an academic and somewhat hides behind it.

A lot of the community are outright hostile about him to be honest. Largely because he likes getting into sweeping conversations about culture. The intro to his series on the Pacific Theater spends probably 20-30 minutes on his thoughts for why Japanese society was so fanatical and he uses some less than polite language to describe it.

Many online history communities tend to shun him because it's the 'internet' thing to do. My experience with the history department at my university was that anyone was happy when pop-history gets flipped into genuine academic interest. So if Carlin and his narrative style gets you curious about things, I'd say keep listening.

[deleted]

Henry II and Thomas Becket?

While not commoners per se, William Marshal, Otto de Grandson, and William Montagu were all members of minor nobility at best who became friends with kings. William Marshal was a companion of Henry the Young King, Otto of Edward I of England, and William Montagu of Edward III of England.

Another example, though later in history, was Aleksandr Danilovich Menshikov, the favourite and confidant of Peter the Great. Unlike the three I mentioned above, Menshikov was not even of gentry status. Another example was Aleksey Grigoryevich Razumovsky, a Ukrainian Cossack who became the lover and probably morganatic husband of Peter the Great's daughter, Empress Yelisaveta.

When I was around 8 or 9, I realised that I knew a lot of English and British monarchs, so I challenged myself to learn all of them. I only got more interested from there.

Not a professional (yet) but that's how I became into history.

Of course, Cleveland did it and won.

Peter the Great has multiple famous examples. Alexander Menshikov was his close advisor and it is suggested by some historians that he was a stable boy as a child. Catherine I, Peter's wife and Empress after his death, was born Marta Helena Skowrońska and lived a life of poverty/peasantry/possibly slavery before becoming mistress to Peter.

Abram Gannibal was originally a slave purchased as a boy from Africa by Peter the Great, who recieved an education and became a military engineer/nobleman into the time of Elizabeth's rule if my memory serves correctly.

Scholars argue whether Daniel from the Book of Daniel in the Hebrew Bible was a real person or not, but his story certainly counts if so.

KC is DECENT. I think Texas and the South Carolina do it better though.

Thanks for sharing this! Great research

[removed]

For starters, they would need their current government to agree with that plan.

Or they would have to declare independence while their government is actively engaging in genocidal policies against them.
In that case, this fact needs to be widely recognized. They might even receive international help for their struggle.

Another option is declaring independence when the previous country is already falling apart.

In any case, for a successful declaration of independence, the group seeking independence would need to be a distinct ethnic, religious, or linguistic community that lives in a specific region and is a majority in that region.

[removed]

If the project's to thrive, most important is a strong sense of distinct shared identity and a competent political leadership capable of uniting the country and winning international recognition. Anyone can declare independence and set up a government: that's the easy part; making it last is another matter, and the conditions for success and for effective statehood can't be conjured out of nothing.